home

Debate Hosts Set

The hosts for the presidential debates have been announced. They are: NBC's Lester Holt, ABC's Martha Raddatz, CNN's Anderson Cooper and Fox News's Chris Wallace.

Donald will find something to squawk about, I'm sure, but there's no way he can skip the debates. I think the drinking game will be how many times he says "email" and crook".

< Donald and Rudy: Two Peas in a Pod | Tuesday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Too (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by FlJoe on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 02:41:13 PM EST
    bad they couldn't get Soledad O'Brien, in my book the one of best Journalists ever to grace CNN. More of this please(even though I hold a bit of a grudge for her getting me hooked on CNN).

    Sorry - (none / 0) (#6)
    by BackFromOhio on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 08:04:11 PM EST
    my watched this comment relates to Soledad. Thanks!

    Parent
    I object to... (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by desertswine on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 04:19:19 PM EST
    Chris Wallace, Anchor, Fox News Sunday
    Wednesday, October 19, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV

    I see a conflict of interest here.  Fox "news" and Wallace are Repub mouthpieces and have an interest in a Trump presidency.

    i thought... (none / 0) (#7)
    by linea on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 10:33:43 PM EST
    isn't chris wallace and all those "Repub mouthpieces" in the media shilling for big corporate interests and adamantly opposed to trump's stated policies?

    Parent
    From Think Progress... (5.00 / 6) (#8)
    by desertswine on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 12:11:37 AM EST
    Chris Wallace, who hosts Fox News Sunday, will be the sole moderator for the third debate, to be held October 19 in Las Vegas. While Wallace has not been as overtly pro-Trump as many others on the conservative network, he does have a huge conflict of interest: his relationship with Roger Ailes.

    Wallace is has close personal and professional ties to Roger Ailes, who was his boss until a few weeks ago and is now reportedly helping Trump prepare for the debate.
    When Ailes was forced out of his position due to a string of credible sexual harassment allegations, Wallace showered him with praise.

    Wallace said that he was "very proud to be a representative of Fox" in his role as debate moderator. He agreed with Kurtz that his selection dispelled the notion that Fox was a "right-wing network" that "favors Republicans."
    According to Wallace, his selection means the debate commission looked at Fox News' body of work and decided it really was "fair and balanced."

    Wallace too has been fiercely loyal to Ailes. Here is what he told the New York Times shortly after the Ailes' resignation.

    "Roger Ailes is the best boss I've had in almost a half a century in journalism. I admired him tremendously professionally, and loved him personally...
    There are people in tears. I shed mine a couple of days ago when the stories started to come out, that made this day seem like it was likely. I never knew a boss who transmitted a sense of mission, a team of common purpose, more than Roger did. And the thing that's different from any place I ever worked is, people feel a personal connection to Roger, and I think a lot of people feel a deep sense of personal loss."

    So Wallace, who is moderating the final and decisive presidential debate, has a longstanding personal and professional connection to Ailes, who is said to be advising Trump on strategy for that debate.

    Fox News' Chris Wallace Named Presidential Debate Moderator, Despite Massive Conflict


    Parent

    He also has now said (5.00 / 4) (#11)
    by jbindc on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 11:26:08 AM EST
    He will not fact check (Donald Trump) during the debate.

    Parent
    oh! thank you! (none / 0) (#9)
    by linea on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 01:27:37 AM EST
    Ailes is [alleged by many women who were subjected to his perversion alegedly] a [allegedly] disgusting [allegedly] abusive pervert [allegedly].

    i never liked megyn kelly... wearing a club dress to work and all that... but i have a much higher opinion of her since she supported the allegations against the [allegedly] absolute abusive perv that is Ailes. i mean this allegedly.

    why are you a "desert swine"? is that some military thing? like slang for veterans from the desert in afganistan or somerhing? i thought you were "dessert wine" for the longest time!  LoL

    Parent

    I'm somewhat overweight... (none / 0) (#12)
    by desertswine on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 02:38:59 PM EST
    (spend too much time in front of the computer, I guess) and I live in a dry place.  If I would lose some weight, I would be a javelina.

    Off the topic - I just saw an elucidating "debate" on Amy Goodman with Chris Hedges and Robert Reich - if it comes on later in your area, I recommend it.

    Parent

    thank you (smile) (none / 0) (#22)
    by linea on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 07:32:47 PM EST
    i checked and it was on at 6am but maybe they might post it as a postcast? i diet but my diets are pretty extreme. everything you're not supposed to do.

    Parent
    Wallace and Debate (none / 0) (#39)
    by mogal on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 12:23:45 PM EST
    How is this happening? Where is the outrage? Women wake up to what is going on.

    Parent
    Too much monkey business... (none / 0) (#10)
    by kdog on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 08:19:53 AM EST
    Same thing every day, gettin' up, turn on the news
    No need for me to complain, my objection's overruled, ahh!

    Too much monkey business, too much monkey business
    Too much monkey business for me to be involved in

    Parent

    I wish they'd dispense with the idea ... (5.00 / 5) (#3)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 05:52:51 PM EST
    ... that only Beltway journalists can be debate moderators. Our scandalmongering east coast media has done an absolutely horrible job covering the candidates this election cycle, being as they're way more obsessed with their own specious opinions about campaign optics, than actually interested in reporting facts and truth.

    Watched this (none / 0) (#5)
    by BackFromOhio on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 08:02:34 PM EST
    Thank you.  

    Parent
    I wish they would get rid of the (none / 0) (#27)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 08:53:21 AM EST
    "moderators" entirely. Just let'em go at each other.

    Parent
    Best two out of three falls? (none / 0) (#30)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 09:43:44 AM EST
    debates should be like law school exams (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by pitachips on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 03:45:14 PM EST
    We should give candidates scenarios and ask them to detail how they would react; to explain their thinking process; to explain what they perceive to be the real issue etc.

    Nowadays the questions are so predictable the candidates already have multi paragraph responses memorized.

    Pretty good idea (none / 0) (#28)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 08:58:15 AM EST
    but who would set the scenarios?

    Trump's side: The country is being flooded with undocumented foreigners...crime is rampant...

    Hillary's side: We need more immigrants...crime is down..

    Parent

    Hillary's side: (5.00 / 7) (#31)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 10:55:02 AM EST
    Why not elect a competent, intelligent president who is actually a patriot and has been vetted to the tune of millions of dollars over 25 years and acquitted BY HER POLITICAL ENEMIES of every crazy accusation that anyone could think of to make?

    Or you could elect a moronic, misogynistic, racist, megalomaniacal, unpatriotic, criminal fraud who does not know what his position is on which direction the sun rises from.

    Why is this described as a "choice?"  I'll take the smart, ethical one with the immense knowledge of world politics, and you can take Trump.  Some explanation should be forthcoming on your part as to why you support the far lesser of the two candidates, a man who has defrauded thousands of people of millions of dollars, over a candidate who has been shown repeatedly to be honest.

    Parent

    Uh, that's a commercial (none / 0) (#40)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 12:31:51 PM EST
    not a scenario.

    Parent
    Uh, your "scenarios" are just (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 03:24:41 PM EST
    contrasting commercials.

    A Neanderthal version of the sort of scenarios pitachips was alluding to.

    Parent

    I take it then (none / 0) (#45)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 06:47:47 PM EST
    ...that you do not care to defend your choice for president.

    Or can't.  Very telling.

    Parent

    Jerayln - Off Topic (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by ding7777 on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 05:38:42 PM EST
    For two days in a row, I have been able to see the [new] comments in the top post.   If your IT guy fixed the problem, thank him for me

    Having just watched (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by Nemi on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 02:35:59 PM EST
    this clip with Martha Raddatz 'interviewing' Kellyanne Conway my head is still buzzing from the latter's non-stop talking. Does anyone believe she, Raddatz, won't also allow Donald Trump to go on, and on, and on, without interruption or fact-checking?

    Somehow I suspect that Chris Wallace may actually turn out to be the most fair of the chosen moderators. And with Roger Ailes now out of Fox and all ...?

    If you want to get blotto, (none / 0) (#4)
    by midcenturymod on Sun Sep 04, 2016 at 06:01:02 PM EST
    I vote for "rigged" for the drinking game!

    One of the gym guys (none / 0) (#13)
    by fishcamp on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 02:46:14 PM EST
    not the usual two, but an actual Democrat, said Trump doesn't want to become president, he wants to merge with Roger Ailes to start a new tv network, like Opra did.  He could probably do it with his new bucks he will make from his presidential run.  And then there's Roger's severance package of many millions.  Not sure how much it costs to start a network.

    Watch out Ailes...you may have found an even (none / 0) (#15)
    by ruffian on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 04:20:23 PM EST
    bigger jerk than you are...no doubt Trump will milk Ailes for all of that money to set up whatever this media thing is going to be. Not a dime of Trump money will go into it, and it will fail miserably.

    Parent
    Trump (none / 0) (#17)
    by ding7777 on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 05:34:24 PM EST
    is also the talent

    Parent
    And, Sean Hannity would be right with them (none / 0) (#16)
    by christinep on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 04:46:08 PM EST
    Add in the Breitbart boys(Bannon & Bossie)...and then, what a group.  Listen, I wouldn't be surprised if that turns out to be the new schema ... along that line, recall the info out of Ukraine, in connection with the lurking-nearby Manafort, which info indicated a potential deal in which Manafort and a partner sought (& purchased?) rights to fund a new Russian cable network.  

    BTW, the exploratory Manafort deal for cable afar did not appear to be a joke when mentioned in an August report.  But, you must surely be jesting about there being a Democrat located at your gym :)

    Parent

    Good info christine, (none / 0) (#19)
    by fishcamp on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 05:51:30 PM EST
    about the Ukraine, Manafort, and Russian cable network.  These evil types seem to all belong to the same club.

    The other Democrat at the gym just kind of blurted out the above mentioned info.  We were the only two in the gym today.  He's a very quiet guy, but I know he overhears the conversations with the two Republicans, and never says a word.  The Republican civil lawyer and Constitutional historian is great about explaining things to many of us.  He's a good guy, but a Hillary hater, so his info cleverly slides from truth to his beliefs.  When the email thing first started he immediately began saying she will be indicted next week.  He went off on me once by telling me he was a lawyer and I wasn't.  After about fifteen minutes I apologized to him, and now we're good. It's a tricky gym.

    Has the lawyer admitted (none / 0) (#20)
    by CoralGables on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 05:57:37 PM EST
    he was horribly wrong?

    Parent
    No, of course not... (none / 0) (#21)
    by fishcamp on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 06:58:16 PM EST
    After all, he's an attorney who knows all about these matters, and you're not.

    ;-D

    You know, the only attorney who ever said that to me, I fired that very same afternoon. She had actually done something else far more serious that first warranted my attention, but when I attempted to speak to her about it, she cut her own throat by dismissing my concerns so curtly in that high-handed manner.

    But unfortunately for her, she worked under me at the legislature and I was her boss. And as I not so subtly reminded her as she headed out the door that last time, while she merely practiced law, I know how to read and write it. Pride goeth before the fall.

    And as we see in this soap opera-ish exposé from the Los Angeles Times on the remarkable petty lives of some Orange County, CA residents -- which is a rather fun read, as exposés go -- some of the biggest numbskulls you'll ever meet are otherwise well-educated attorneys.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Speaking of pride and high handedness (none / 0) (#29)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 09:01:13 AM EST
    while she merely practiced law, I know how to read and write it. Pride goeth before the fall

    The fall comes??

    Parent

    Summer goeth (5.00 / 3) (#32)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 10:57:31 AM EST
    Before the fall.

    Parent
    Amazing. (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 11:17:58 AM EST
    You're the one who's forever whining about self-perceived personal attacks directed at you, and yet you don't ever hesitate to engage in that sort of behavior yourself. And that's why few people care for you, Jim. You're rarely if ever civil, even as you demand it from others.

    Have a nice day.

    Parent

    Uh Donald (none / 0) (#42)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 12:34:22 PM EST
    You made this all about you and displayed a true personality trait.

    I have never bragged about firing someone.

    Parent

    OTHERS in debate. (none / 0) (#23)
    by CityLife on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 08:40:02 PM EST
    The best thing Trump could do would be to insist for open debates to have Jill Stein and Gary Johnson included. (that would be the best for the American people AND it is what MOST people want!  If #Trump wants us to believe he is not a typical politician, why doesn't he call for #OpenDebates? https://twitter.com/RepPress/status/772517961559080961

    i never heard of this (none / 0) (#25)
    by linea on Mon Sep 05, 2016 at 11:06:27 PM EST
    why would people want that?

    does anybody know if historically the presidential debates have much of any impact on the race? doesnt it seem awfully late and doesnt it feel like everybody already decided?

    Parent

    The 1980 debate, which took place ... (none / 0) (#26)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 02:47:31 AM EST
    ... only one week before election day, likely influenced the outcome. Prior to the debate, the polls were essentially a dead heat, with President Jimmy Carter even a point or two ahead in most of them, but there was a large pool of undecided voters who were clearly looking for a reason to replace him. Once they saw that GOP candidate Ronald Reagan wasn't some angry right-wing loon and actually came across as somewhat knowledgeable, the deal was sealed.

    Parent
    If you will recall (5.00 / 4) (#33)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 11:03:18 AM EST
    George Will stole Carter's debate prep book, and the Reagan campaign made a treasonous deal with our sworn enemies in Iran to hold hostages until after the election.  All a matter of record.  Do you think these unethical acts might have influenced the election?

    Parent
    Reagan and his associates should have (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 11:16:19 AM EST
    been prosecuted for violation of the Logan Act.

    Parent
    Of course they did. (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 11:30:28 AM EST
    But as valid as your observation is, it's also one that's offered with the obvious benefit of hindsight.

    The voters themselves didn't know that any of this stuff was happening at the time, because if they had, they'd have likely rejected Reagan's entreaties toward them and re-elected Carter.

    We only learned about it years later, well after the fact and when it was too late to really do anything about it at that point.

    (The same would apply to Nixon's deliberate sabotage of the Paris peace negotiations between the United States and North Vietnam back in the fall of 1968. Public knowledge of that wretched duplicity wasn't learned and confirmed until fairly recently.)

    Aloha.

    Parent

    The response was (none / 0) (#46)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Sep 07, 2016 at 03:55:06 PM EST
    ...to Jim, who suggested that Reagan's presidential demeanor was what turned the election.  In fact it was treason that turned the election, so the point stands.  

    As you pointed out, Nixon was also a traitor, but my mother told me in 1952 that Nixon was a criminal, so that wasn't an unknown factor.

    Parent

    See JFK/Nixon. (none / 0) (#35)
    by oculus on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 11:17:56 AM EST
    voters react to televised debates (none / 0) (#38)
    by ding7777 on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 11:31:27 AM EST
    differently - starting with Nixon sweating on camera and Kennedy looking young and energetic.

    or 1992 when Bush checked his watch during a question

    and of course the 2000 New York Senate debate when Rick Lazio tried to bully Hillary by walking over to her podium and demanding she sign a piece of paper

    unfortunately it all comes down to being entertained, so Tr*mp has an advantage

    Parent

    Of course you're correct.... (none / 0) (#41)
    by NYShooter on Tue Sep 06, 2016 at 12:33:00 PM EST
    All "Optics."

    When Reagan responded to a statement by Carter criticizing him, he responded with that famous chuckle, and, "There you go again." And, who can forget his closer,"Are you better off now than you were four years ago?"....ouch.

    And, if, after four years in the White House, Carter needed a briefing book to beat the actor, maybe he didn't deserve another four years. Also, maybe the viewers didn't fully appreciate Carter's "down home values" in responding to a question on nuclear weapons, "I had a discussion with my daughter, Amy, the other day, before I came here, to ask her what the most important issue was ..."

    "thud".....Buh bye, Jimmah

    Parent